4 ms·

I find it quite dangerous to think most people are too naive to vote on important issues. Trained politicians are also very much impacted by gut reactions and i

by hrzn 10y ago

I find it quite dangerous to think most people are too naive to vote on important issues. Trained politicians are also very much impacted by gut reactions and irrational behavior (though in favour of one's own party/career/etc). People don't necessarily all use the same objective functions. I think many were disappointed by the EU as they perceive it as an economic-only enterprise, where not everyone wins. I think many could be OK with a lower GDP, and a slower and more local economy, etc. It's not so clear on the long run what will actually be the best for UK and its people. In Switzerland, people vote on different issues about 12 times a year. Some of these issues are quite complex and technical (for instance, how should benefits of some state-dependent companies be handled, etc). Some are easy yet extremely consequential. Usually there is no particular tendency to fall for the easy stories based on gut feelings. In general I think that able to vote is more important (mostly for stability), even if it leaves a door open to populism.

noobermin 10y ago
Right, the correct answer is a well-informed public, and the answer is education.
coryfklein 10y ago
> I find it quite dangerous to think most people are too naive to vote on important issues. I disagree. Sure it's possible to have a public educated enough to decide whether being in the EU is a good idea, (hi Switzerland), but the fact of the matter is that this doesn't apply to either the US or likely the UK. It's possible to have a nation where direct democracy is effective, but I'd say it's more the exception to the rule.
- nzp 10y ago
  So how did you establish "the fact" that the Swiss public, in particular, is "educated enough" and the US and the UK public, in particular, are not? Is there a standard somewhere, a test that was done, or is it just the good old "seems to me"?
  - coryfklein 10y ago
    > how did you establish "the fact" that the Swiss public, in particular, is "educated enough" I didn't - I said it's possible. > the US and the UK public, in particular, are not? To me this seems a self-apparent fact, but I admit it may not appear so to others. I'm not sure specifically where I'd lie my standard, but I'd say the public support for Donald Trump falls dramatically below wherever it would be.

by hrzn 10y ago

noobermin 10y ago

Right, the correct answer is a well-informed public, and the answer is education.

coryfklein 10y ago

> I find it quite dangerous to think most people are too naive to vote on important issues. I disagree. Sure it's possible to have a public educated enough to decide whether being in the EU is a good idea, (hi Switzerland), but the fact of the matter is that this doesn't apply to either the US or likely the UK. It's possible to have a nation where direct democracy is effective, but I'd say it's more the exception to the rule.

nzp 10y ago
So how did you establish "the fact" that the Swiss public, in particular, is "educated enough" and the US and the UK public, in particular, are not? Is there a standard somewhere, a test that was done, or is it just the good old "seems to me"?
- coryfklein 10y ago
  > how did you establish "the fact" that the Swiss public, in particular, is "educated enough" I didn't - I said it's possible. > the US and the UK public, in particular, are not? To me this seems a self-apparent fact, but I admit it may not appear so to others. I'm not sure specifically where I'd lie my standard, but I'd say the public support for Donald Trump falls dramatically below wherever it would be.